| Revision as of 23:53, 16 March 2006 editWill Beback (talk | contribs)112,162 edits what policy needs to be changed?← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:54, 16 March 2006 edit undoWill Beback (talk | contribs)112,162 editsm spNext edit → | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| :Several computer experts and executives are mentioned in the Washington Post article, none of them have Misplaced Pages articles. This article was deleted in |
:Several computer experts and executives are mentioned in the Washington Post article, none of them have Misplaced Pages articles. This article was deleted in an AfD and its deletion was confirmed at ]. It is not clear what policy you want changed. -] 23:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 23:54, 16 March 2006
The article John Bambenek was deleted after a drive-by bad-faith nomination who didn't even enter the AfD correctly (because anons can't start AfD's). You can view the comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/John Bambenek (2nd nomination) and at the deletion review here. For reference, the first AfD was less than 3 months earlier, the result was kept, and nothing changed except the subject was referenced in both the New York Times and Jackson Clarion-Ledger since the first AfD. Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/John Bambenek. The subject has multiple REAL books published (which can be bought in paper form in edition to writing some of the certification material for SANS/GIAC. He has a few papers out there, including the only study that estimated how much money has been compromised by spyware. Notability is achieved a number of ways. There are about a dozen mainstream media mentions for his information security work. He contributes regularly to several blogs that reach over 5000 a day. He was referenced by the New York Times in a front page article. Namely, this suffices to meet criteria 6, 8, and 9 in WP:BIO. The deleting votes actually argued that being mentioned in the New York Times as an expert in computer security and used for a source in an article that had a global audience was evidence of non-notability. User:Tony Sidaway, not known for being an inclusionist, voted to keep the article because the deletion was absurd. 14 of his articles for the self-financed paper Daily Illini with a circulation of 20,000 have been syndicated (also generally considered as making one notable) according to Lexis-Nexis.
- The AfD should have never taken place because the original nominator didn't even do it correctly, nor had the ability to start it.
- It was an obvious bad faith nomination.
- The AfD should have never taken place because it was too soon after the 1st AfD.
- The notability of the subject is established meeting not one, but 3 of the criteria in WP:BIO.
- Many of the people voting for deletion claimed things that were not even true. The books were not online, they were paper, for instance. The Daily Illini is not a "college paper" but a self-financed publication that is entirely seperate from the University. Check the corporate listings for Illini Media Company (DI's parent company) here.
-- Alpha269 00:01, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
WashPo article mentioning research. -- Alpha269 23:46, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
- Several computer experts and executives are mentioned in the Washington Post article, none of them have Misplaced Pages articles. This article was deleted in an AfD and its deletion was confirmed at WP:DR. It is not clear what policy you want changed. -Will Beback 23:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)